Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Short excerpts (except for the citations from Protestants) from the second chapter of my upcoming book, The Church Fathers Were Catholic, entitled, "Salvation, Justification, Penance, and Related Issues". "Revised Protestant Standard" ["RPS"] readings (with all abominable Catholic corruptions eliminated and biblical notions installed) -- also added presently -- will be in purple.

Protestant Definitions of Justification by Faith Alone

Justification, as thus defined, is therefore a declarative act, as distinguished from an efficient act; an act of God external to the sinner, as distinguished from an act within the sinner's nature and changing that nature; a judicial act, as distinguished from a sovereign act; an act based upon and logically presupposing the sinner's union with Christ, as distinguished from an act which causes and is followed by that union with Christ.

(2) Justification is an act of grace to the sinner, who in himself deserves condemnation.

(3) . . . It does not produce any subjective change in the person justified. It does not effect a change of character, making those good who were bad, those holy who were unholy. That is done in regeneration and sanctification . . . It is a forensic or judicial act . . . It is a declarative act in which God pronounces the sinner just or righteous . . .

(4) The meritorious ground of justification is not faith; we are not justified on account of our faith, considered as a virtuous or holy act or state of mind. Nor are our works of any kind the ground of justification . . . The ground of justification is the righteousness of Christ . . . including His perfect obedience to the law as a covenant and His enduring the penalty of the law in our stead and in our behalf.

(5) The righteousness of Christ is in justification imputed to the believer. That is, it is set to his account, so that he is entitled to plead it at the bar of God, as though it were personally and inherently his own."

Grace and works are antithetical . . . Grace of necessity excludes works of every kind, and more especially those of the highest kind, which might have some show of merit. But merit of any degree is of necessity excluded if our salvation be by grace . . .

The sins which are pardoned in justification include all sins, past, present, and future. (Ibid., 458, 461)

Is the Catholic Church resting on the firm historical ground on which it claims to be resting? Contrary to some misleading quoting of church fathers and a lot of history revision on the part of Catholic apologists, the doctrines that are unique to the Roman Catholic Church not only contradict scripture, but also contradict what many of the early church fathers believed. The historical record is at odds with what the Catholic Church teaches. The Catholic Church doesn't represent historic Christianity, as instituted by Jesus and the apostles. Catholicism is a false religion that came into being centuries after the time of Christ and the apostles, and has only gotten more heretical with the passing of time.

When the beliefs of the earliest church fathers are examined, what's found is much closer to evangelical beliefs than Catholic beliefs. Even among the later church fathers, who might be considered closer to Catholicism, there are a lot of differences between what those church fathers believed and what the Roman Catholic Church teaches.

. . . The church fathers often disagreed with one another, and some of them held views that were similar to what the Catholic Church teaches. But their views on some of the most controversial issues today (salvation, church government, Marian doctrine, etc.) were non-Catholic. It was only after centuries of gradual departure from what Jesus and the apostles taught that the Catholic Church came into being.

. . . The intent of this article isn't to suggest that the early church fathers are as authoritative as the Bible, but rather to demonstrate that even in the territory the Catholic Church claims as its stronghold (post-apostolic tradition), Catholicism fails to live up to its claims. Not only does the Bible stand in condemnation of the Roman Catholic Church, but the early church fathers do as well.

It does not seem that any discussion of ancient theology can be pursued without invoking the great name of Augustine. But surely by now Roman controversialists should be aware that Augustine is no friend of their cause.

Let us take Enoch, for example, who was found righteous in obedience and so was taken up and did not experience death. (Letter to the Corinthians / First Clement, 9: 3; Lightfoot / Harmer / Holmes, 33; cf. 11:1; 12:1)

[RPS alternate reading: "Enoch, for example, who was found righteous because of his faith alone and God's imputed righteousness"]

Abraham, who was called “the Friend,” was found faithful in that he became obedient to the words of God. (Letter to the Corinthians / First Clement, 10: 1; Lightfoot / Harmer / Holmes, 33)

[RPS: ". . . was found faithful in that he exercised faith alone and was therefore declared righteous"]

Take care, dear friends, lest his many benefits turn into a judgment upon all of us, as will happen if we fail to live worthily of him, and to do harmoniously those things which are good and well-pleasing in his sight . . . It is right, therefore, that we should not be deserters of his will. (Letter to the Corinthians / First Clement, 21: 1, 4; Lightfoot / Harmer / Holmes, 40)

[RPS: ". . . a judgment upon all of us, as will happen if we fail to have faith alone. But to do harmoniously those things which are good and well-pleasing in his sight has nothing to do with justification . . . It is right, therefore, also to believe that we cannot possibly be deserters of his will"]

Since, therefore, all things are seen and heard, let us fear him and abandon the abominable lusts that spawn evil works, in order that we may be shielded by his mercy from the coming judgments. For where can any of us escape from his mighty hand? And what world will receive any of those who desert him? (Letter to the Corinthians / First Clement, 28: 1-2; Lightfoot / Harmer / Holmes, 44)

[RPS: ". . . let us fear him with faith alone, in order that we may be shielded by his mercy from the coming judgments. . . . And no world will receive any of those who desert him, because it is not possible to desert God"]

Let us therefore join with those to whom grace is given by God. Let us clothe ourselves in concord, being humble and self-controlled, keeping ourselves far from all backbiting and slander, being justified by works and not by words. (Letter to the Corinthians / First Clement, 30: 3; Lightfoot / Harmer / Holmes, 44-45)

[RPS: ". . . being justified by faith and not by works."]

All, therefore, were glorified and magnified, not through themselves or their own works or the righteous actions which they did, but through his will. And so we, having been called through his will in Christ Jesus, are not justified through ourselves or through our own wisdom or understanding or piety or works which we have done in holiness of heart, but through faith, by which the almighty God has justified all who have existed from the beginning; to whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen. (Letter to the Corinthians / First Clement, 32: 3-4; Lightfoot / Harmer / Holmes, 45-46)

[RPS: the committee for the RPS has approved this passage as written, because they believe that it "proves" that Clement held to justification by faith alone, just as Luther and Calvin did. They have concluded also that virtually all the other passages here cited -- because they contradict this one, so they say -- were corrupted by later Catholic additions. Somehow by the grace of God, however, this passage escaped untouched. Praise God! His truth always gets through somehow, despite the efforts of wicked, unregenerate men!]

The good worker receives the bread of his labor confidently, but the lazy and careless dares not look his employer in the face. It is, therefore, necessary that we should be zealous to do good, for all things come from him. For he forewarns us: “Behold, the Lord comes, and his reward is with him, to pay each one according to his work.” He exhorts us, therefore, who believe in him with our whole heart, not to be idle or careless about any good work. (Letter to the Corinthians / First Clement, 34: 1-4; Lightfoot / Harmer / Holmes, 46-47)

[RPS: The one who exercises faith in faith alone receives the bread of his profession of belief confidently, but the catholic* dares not look God in the face. It is, therefore, necessary that we should be zealous to believe in faith, for all things come from him. For he forewarns us: “Behold, the Lord comes, and his reward is with him, to pay each one according to his faith.” He exhorts us, therefore, who believe in him with our whole heart, to understand that good works have nothing to do with justification, which is by faith alone in Christ alone by grace alone for the glory of God alone, in Protestant sectarian churches alone **though none of the five "alones" are alone."

* The committee is divided as to the translation of the word used here. Manuscripts differ. Some suggest that unregenerate is the proper word; others have papist and Romanist. In deference to current usage, the committee (i.e., by a very slight majority and a registered protest by the minority) decided upon catholic as the best word to use. Use of a capital "C" was also controversial and discussed with great vigor, but by a vote of one, the uncapitalized c won out.

** the words following do not appear in all manuscripts; nevertheless the committee has decided upon this later manuscript tradition because they feel that it is a helpful clarification of the peculiar Protestant "alone but not alone" slogans and terminology]

Let us therefore make every effort to be found in the number of those who patiently wait for him, so that we may share in his promised gifts. But how shall this be, dear friends? If our mind is fixed on God through faith; if we seek out those things which are well-pleasing and acceptable to him; if we accomplish those things which are in harmony with his faultless will, and follow the way of truth, casting off from ourselves all unrighteousness and lawlessness, covetousness, strife, malice and deceit, gossip and slander, hatred of God, pride and arrogance, vanity and inhospitality. (Letter to the Corinthians / First Clement, 35: 1-5; Lightfoot / Harmer / Holmes, 47)

[RPS: ". . . if we exercise the faith that is well-pleasing and acceptable to him; if we believe those things which are in harmony with his faultless will, and follow the way of faith alone, casting off from ourselves all belief that good works or infused righteousness have anything to do with justification"]

Let us, therefore, join with the innocent and righteous, for these are the elect of God. (Letter to the Corinthians / First Clement, 46: 4; Lightfoot / Harmer / Holmes, 54)

[RPS: "Let us, therefore, join with those whom God has granted imputed righteousness, for these are the elect of God"]

Blessed are we, dear friends, if we continue to keep God’s commandments in the harmony of love, that our sins may be forgiven us through love. For it is written: “Blessed are those whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will reckon no sin, and in whose mouth there is no deceit.” (Letter to the Corinthians / First Clement, 50: 5-6; Lightfoot / Harmer / Holmes, 56)

[RPS: "Blessed are we, dear friends, if we continue to believe in faith that our sins may be forgiven us through God's extrinsic declaration, though still present. For it is written: “Blessed are those whose iniquities are declared null and void and nonexistent, and whose sins are covered, so that God acts as if they are not there at all. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will reckon no sin, and in whose mouth there is no denial of justification by faith alone”]

[S]urely will the one who with humility and constant gentleness has kept without regret the ordinances and commandments given by God be enrolled and included among the number of those who are saved through Jesus Christ, through whom is the glory to him for ever and ever. Amen. (Letter to the Corinthians / First Clement, 58: 2; Lightfoot / Harmer / Holmes, 61)

[RPS: "Surely will the one who, despite a lack of humility and gentleness has believed without regret that faith alone makes the way straight for the salvation given by God, so as to be enrolled and included among the number of those who are saved through Jesus Christ in faith alone by grace alone and not by works alone, or any works all, because, as Holy Scripture teaches us: 'no one does what is righteous, no, not one,' and 'all our deeds are as filthy rags, lest anyone should boast'"]

Ignatius of Antioch (d. c. 110)

[T]hose who profess to be Christ’s will be recognized by their actions. For the Work is not a matter of what one promises now, but of persevering to the end in the power of faith. (Letter to the Ephesians, 14:2; Lightfoot / Harmer / Holmes, 91)

[RPS: "Those who profess to be Christ’s will be recognized by their profession of faith alone"]

Justin Martyr (d. 165)

[E]ach man goes to everlasting punishment or salvation according to the value of his actions. (First Apology, Chapter XII; ANF, Vol. I, 177)

[RPS: "Each man goes to everlasting punishment or salvation according to whether he professes faith alone or not"]

[F]or not those who make profession, but those who do the works, shall be saved, according to His word: . . . (First Apology, Chapter XVI; ANF, Vol. I)

[RPS: "For those who make profession of faith alone, not based on doing works, shall be saved"]

[T]hey who choose the good have worthy rewards, and they who choose the opposite have their merited awards. (First Apology, Chapter XLIII; ANF, Vol. I)

[RPS: "They who choose faith alone have worthy rewards, and they who refuse to proclaim it are eternally lost"]

So that if they repent, all who wish for it can obtain mercy from God: . . . not as you deceive yourselves, and some others who resemble you in this, who say, that even though they be sinners, but know God, the Lord will not impute sin to them . . . how can the impure and utterly abandoned, if they weep not, and mourn not, and repent not, entertain the hope that the Lord will not impute to them sin? (First Apology, Chapter CXLI; ANF, Vol. I)

[RPS: "Even though they be sinners, but know God, the Lord will not impute sin to them"]

Irenaeus (d. 202)

God has given that which is good, and those who do it will receive glory and honor because they have done good when they had it in their power not to do so. But those who do not do it will receive the just judgment of God, because they did not do good when they had it in their power to do so. (Against Heresies, IV, 37, 1; commenting on Romans 2:7; Bray, 59; ANF, Vol. I: 519)

[RPS: "those who accept God's gift of faith alone will receive glory and honor, not because they have done good, which is a separate category of sanctification, that has nothing to do with justification by faith alone"].

This able wrestler, therefore [having just cited Paul in 1 Cor 9:24-27], exhorts us to the struggle for immortality, that we may be crowned, and may deem the crown precious, namely, that which is acquired by our struggle, but which does not encircle us of its own accord . . . (Against Heresies, IV, 37, 7; ANF, Vol. I)

Clement of Alexandria (d. 215)

[W]hen we hear, “Thy faith hath saved thee,” we do not understand Him to say absolutely that those who have believed in any way whatever shall be saved, unless also works follow . . . No one, then, can be a believer and at the same time be licentious . . . those that have been glorified through righteousness. (Stromata / Miscellanies, Chapter XIV; ANF, Vol. II)

[RPS: "those who have believed shall be saved, apart from any works . . . a believer can at the same time be licentious, because God imputes righteousness and overlooks the sin . . . glorified through imputed, not actual righteousness"]

Tertullian (d. 225)

A good deed has God as its debtor, just as an evil has too . . . . Further, no deed but an evil one deserves to be called sin, . . . (On Repentance, Chapter II; ANF, Vol. III)

[RPS: "God has no debts to anyone because that would deprive Him of His glory . . . all deeds done by the unregenerate are evil and sinful"]

Hippolytus (d. 236)

He, in administering the righteous judgment of the Father to all, assigns to each what is righteous according to his works . . . the justification will be seen in the awarding to each that which is just; since to those who have done well shall be assigned righteously eternal bliss, and to the lovers of iniquity shall be given eternal punishment. (Against Plato, 3; ANF, Vol. V, 222-223)

[RPS: "what is righteous according to God's imputed justification . . . the justification will be seen in the awarding of eternal bliss to those who have proclaimed faith alone"]

Origen (d. 254)

[B]elievers are to be instructed not to think that it is enough merely to believe [lacking fruit]; they ought to realize that the just judgment of God will reward each one according to his works. (Commentary on Romans [2:5]; Bray, 57-58)

[RPS: "God will reward each one not according to his works but according to whether he accepted salvation by grace through faith alone"]

Let no one think that someone who has faith enough to be justified and to have glory before God can at the same time have unrighteousness dwelling in him as well. (Commentary on Romans [4:2]; Bray, 109-110)

[RPS: "Let everyone think that faith alone is enough to be justified despite unrighteousness dwelling in everyone, which is overlooked by God because all have fallen short of the glory of God and no one does good"]

Cyprian (d. 258)

There is need of righteousness, that one may deserve well of God the Judge; we must obey His precepts and warnings, that our merits may receive their reward. (On the Unity of the Church, 16; ANF, Vol. V, 423)

[RPS: "There is need of faith alone, that one may deserve well of God the Judge; no one can perfectly obey His precepts and warnings, and there is no such thing as merit"]

Lactantius (d. 320)

[W]e may either lose that true and eternal life by our vices, or win it by virtue. (Divine Institutes, 7:5; ANF, Vol. VII, 200)

[E]ach one will be called to judgment in these points--whether he have kept the faith and truly observed the commandments. (Life of Antony; NPNF 2, Vol. IV, 205)

[RPS: "Each one will be called to judgment based on whether he believes in faith alone, apart from truly observing the commandments, which are part of sanctification, not justification"]

Basil the Great (d. 379)

In like manner they which have grieved the Holy Spirit by the wickedness of their ways, . . . shall be deprived of what they have received, their grace being transferred to others; . . . meaning complete separation from the Spirit. (De Spiritu Sancto, chapter 15; NPNF 2, Vol. VIII)

[RPS: "No one can be deprived of the grace that they have received, or be separated from the Spirit, because God decrees all such things and declares who will persevere from eternity"]

It is yours according to your merit to be “ever with the Lord” . . . (De Spiritu Sancto, Chapter 28; NPNF 2, Vol. VIII)

[RPS: "It is yours not according to merit at all to be 'ever with the Lord'"]

Gregory Nyssa (d. 394)

[F]aith without works of justice is not sufficient for salvation . . . (Homilies on Ecclesiastes, 8; Jurgens, II, 45-46)

[RPS: "Faith without works is sufficient for salvation"]

Ambrose (d. 397)

Nor again is any one more blessed than he who is sensible of the needs of the poor, and the hardships of the weak and helpless. In the day of judgment he will receive salvation from the Lord, Whom he will have as his debtor for the mercy he has shown. (On the Duties of the Clergy, Book I, 11, 39; NPNF 2, Vol. X)

[RPS: "Nor again is any one more blessed than he who believes in faith alone and has justification imputed to him apart from all righteousness and works. In the day of judgment he will receive salvation from the Lord"]

But the sacred Scriptures say that eternal life rests on a knowledge of divine things and on the fruit of good works. (On the Duties of the Clergy, Book II, 2, 5; NPNF 2, Vol. X)

[RPS: ". . . eternal life rests on justification by faith alone and not on the fruit of good works"]

John Chrysostom (d. 407)

“Is it then enough,” saith one, “to believe on the Son, that one may have eternal life?” By no means. . . . let us not suppose that the (knowledge) spoken of is sufficient for our salvation . . . Since though he has said here, “He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life,” . . . yet not even from this do we assert that faith alone is sufficient to salvation. And the directions for living given in many places of the Gospels show this. (Homily XXXI, 1, On John 3:35-36; NPNF 1, Vol. XIV)

[RPS: "It is enough 'to believe on the Son, that one may have eternal life?' By all means. . . . let us believe that the knowledge spoken of is sufficient for our salvation . . . we assert that faith alone is sufficient to salvation"]

Here Paul stirs up those who had fallen away during the persecutions and shows that it is not right to trust in faith only. For God's tribunal will demand deeds as well. (Homilies on Romans, 5; commenting on Romans 2:7; Bray, 59; NPNF 1, Vol. XI: 362)

[RPS: "Here Paul stirs up those who cannot possibly fall away even during the persecutions, and shows that it is right to trust in faith only. For God's tribunal has nothing to do with deeds"]

Hence I beseech you, let us be zealous in practicing those very deeds (by no other way, in fact, is it possible to be saved) . . . (Homilies on Genesis 47,18; commenting on Romans 2:13; Bray, 66; Deferrari, Vol. 87: 24)

[RPS: "I beseech you, let us be zealous in proclaiming justification by faith alone (by no other way, in fact, is it possible to be saved)"]

For what he saith is this, "Your salvation is not our work alone, but your own as well; . . . for not through believing only cometh your salvation, but also through the suffering and enduring the same things with us. (Homily on the Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians; on 2 Cor 1:6-7; speaking as if from St. Paul’s perspective; NPNF 1: Vol. XII, 277)

[RPS: "For what he saith is this, "Your salvation is God's work alone, and not at all your own . . . for through believing only cometh your salvation, not through the suffering and enduring the same things with us"]

[L]et us have a regard for our own salvation, let us make virtue our care, let us rouse ourselves to the practice of good works, that we may be counted worthy to attain to this exceeding glory, in Jesus Christ our Lord . . . (Homily IV on Ephesians 2:10; NPNF 1: Vol. XIII, 68)

[RPS: "Let us acknowledge that we have nothing to do with our own salvation, and that the practice of good works, though praiseworthy in themselves, likewise have nothing whatsoever to do with being counted worthy to attain to this exceeding glory"]

Jerome (d. 420)

God created us with free will, and we are not forced by necessity either to virtue or to vice. Otherwise, if there be necessity, there is no crown. As in good works it is God who brings them to perfection, for it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that pitieth and gives us help that we may be able to reach the goal. (Against Jovinian, Book II, 3; NPNF 2, Vol. VI)

[RPS: "God predestined us from all eternity to fall from grace and thus no longer have free will, and thus we are forced by necessity either to virtue or to vice. Without necessity, there is no crown"]

Theodore of Mopsuestia (d. 428)

Paul . . . said it in order to counter those who concluded from this that anyone who wished to could be justified simply by willing faith. (Pauline Commentary From the Greek Church; commenting on Romans 3:28; Bray, 104-105)

[RPS: "Paul said it in order to teach that anyone who wished to could be justified simply by willing faith alone in Christ alone by grace alone by Scripture alone"]

Augustine (d. 430)

But if someone already regenerate and justified should, of his own will, relapse into his evil life, certainly that man cannot say: “I have not received’; because he lost the grace he received from God and by his own free choice went to evil. (Admonition and Grace [c. 427], 6,9; Jurgens, III, 157)

[RPS: "Someone already regenerate and justified cannot possibly relapse into his evil life, because of the grace he received from God; therefore he has no free choice to return to evil and can only be saved"]

Now, if the wicked man were to be saved by fire on account of his faith only, . . . then faith without works would be sufficient to salvation. But then what the apostle James said would be false. (Enchiridionof Faith, Hope, and Love, Chapter XVIII, paragraph 3; NPNF 1, Vol. III)

[RPS: "Now, the wicked man can only be saved on account of his faith only, . . . faith without works is sufficient to salvation, and what the apostle James said was false"]

Unintelligent persons, however, with regard to the apostle's statement: "We conclude that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law," have thought him to mean that faith suffices to a man, even if he lead a bad life, and has no good works. (A Treatise on Grace and Free Will; Chapters 18; NPNF 1, Vol. V)

[RPS: "Intelligent persons, with regard to the apostle's statement: "We conclude that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law," have thought him to mean that faith suffices to a man, even if he lead a bad life, and has no good works"]

[E]ven those good works of ours, which are recompensed with eternal life, belong to the grace of God, . . . the apostle himself, after saying, "By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast;" saw, of course, the possibility that men would think from this statement that good works are not necessary to those who believe, but that faith alone suffices for them . . . "Not of works" is spoken of the works which you suppose have their origin in yourself alone; but you have to think of works for which God has moulded (that is, has formed and created) you. . . . grace is for grace, as if remuneration for righteousness; in order that it may be true, because it is true, that God "shall reward every man according to his works." (A Treatise on Grace and Free Will; Chapter 20; NPNF 1, Vol. V)

[RPS: "Good works of ours are not recompensed with eternal life, and are opposed to the grace of God, . . . the apostle himself believed, of course, that good works are not necessary to those who believe, but that faith alone suffices for them . . . it is not true that God "shall reward every man according to his works"]

Wherefore, even eternal life itself, which is surely the reward of good works, the apostle calls the gift of God . . . We are to understand, then, that man’s good deserts are themselves the gift of God, so that when these obtain the recompense of eternal life, it is simply grace given for grace. Man, therefore, was thus made upright that, though unable to remain in his uprightness without divine help, he could of his own mere will depart from it. (Enchiridion of Faith, Hope, and Love, chapter 107; NPNF 1, Vol. III)

[RPS: "Eternal life itself is surely not the reward of good works, the apostle calls the gift of God. We are to understand, then, that man’s good deserts are themselves the gift of God, and have nothing to do with the recompense of eternal life, because that would be contrary to grace and justification by faith alone. Man cannot of his own mere will depart from God's grace"]

This must not be understood in such a way as to say that a man who has received faith and continues to live is righteous, even though he leads a wicked life. (Questions 76.1; commenting on Romans 3:28; Bray, 105; Defferari, Vol. 70, 195)

[RPS: "This must be understood in such a way as to say that a man who has received faith and continues to live is righteous through imputed justification, even though he leads a wicked life"]

He who made you without your consent does not justify you without your consent. He made you without your knowledge, but He does not justify you without your willing it. (Sermons, 169, 3; Jurgens, III, 29)

[RPS: "He who made you without your consent also justifies you without your consent. He made you without your knowledge, and so justifies you without your willing it"]

Someone says to me: “Since we are acted upon, it is not we who act.” I answer, “No, you both act and are acted upon; and if you are acted upon by the good, you act properly. For the spirit of God who moves you, by so moving, is your Helper. The very term helper makes it clear that you yourself are doing something.” (Sermons 156, 11; Jurgens, III, 28)

[RPS: "Someone says to me: 'Since we are acted upon, it is not we who act.' This is correct, because one cannot both act and be acted upon (it must be one or the other); and if you are acted upon by the good, you act properly, by necessity, and cannot do otherwise (Martin Luther and John Calvin will also understand this very well 1100 years after I die). For the spirit of God who moves you, by so moving, is your Helper. The very term helper makes it clear that you yourself are not doing anything"]

[N]either is the law condemned by the apostle nor is free will taken away from man. (On Romans 13-18; commenting on Romans 3:20; Bray, 96; Landes, 5, 7)

[RPS: "The law is condemned by the apostle and free will is taken away from man"]

Theodoret (d. 466)

Well-doing is for a time, but the reward is eternal . . . Paul wanted to show that there are many rewards for those who are good. (Interpretation of the Letter to the Romans; commentary on Romans 2:7; Bray, 60; Migne PG 82 col. 69)

[RPS: "Well-doing is for a time, but only justification by faith alone receives the reward that is eternal . . . Paul wanted to show that there is an eternal reward of salvation for those who proclaim belief in justification by faith alone by grace alone in Christ alone for the glory of God alone, without any of the four 'alones' actually being alone, but only proclaimed as such and imputed to the believer alone by God alone through Christ alone . . ."]

Overviews of Patristic Soteriology

If any one expects to find in this period [100-325], or in any of the church fathers, Augustin himself not excepted, the Protestant doctrine of justification by faith alone, . . . he will be greatly disappointed . . . Paul's doctrine of justification, except perhaps in Clement of Rome, who joins it with the doctrine of James, is left very much out of view, and awaits the age of the Reformation to be more thoroughly established and understood.

(Philip Schaff, HCC 2, 588-589)

Whereas Augustine taught that the sinner is made righteous in justification, Melanchthon taught that he is counted as righteous or pronounced to be righteous. For Augustine, 'justifying righteousness' is imparted; for Melanchthon, it is imputed in the sense of being declared or pronounced to be righteous. Melanchthon drew a sharp distinction between the event of being declared righteous and the process of being made righteous, designating the former 'justification' and the latter 'sanctification' or 'regeneration.' For Augustine, these were simply different aspects of the same thing . . .

The importance of this development lies in the fact that it marks a complete break with the teaching of the church up to that point. From the time of Augustine onwards, justification had always been understood to refer to both the event of being declared righteous and the process of being made righteous. Melanchthon's concept of forensic justification diverged radically from this. As it was taken up by virtually all the major reformers subsequently, it came to represent a standard difference between Protestant and Roman Catholic from then on . . .

The Council of Trent . . . reaffirmed the views of Augustine on the nature of justification . . . the concept of forensic justification actually represents a development in Luther's thought . . . .

Trent maintained the medieval tradition, stretching back to Augustine, which saw justification as comprising both an event and a process . . .

[O]ne can be saved without believing that imputed righteousness (or forensic justification) is an essential part of the true gospel. Otherwise, few people were saved between the time of the apostle Paul and the Reformation, since scarcely anyone taught imputed righteousness (or forensic justification) during that period! . . . . .

For Augustine, justification included both the beginnings of one's righteousness before God and its subsequent perfection -- the event and the process. What later became the Reformation concept of “sanctification” then is effectively subsumed under the aegis of justification. Although he believed that God initiated the salvation process, it is incorrect to say that Augustine held to the concept of “forensic” justification. This understanding of justification is a later development of the Reformation . . .

. . . a feature in Augustinianism which Protestants will no doubt find interesting is that God may regenerate a person without causing that one to finally persevere [City of God, 10.8] . . .

Augustine does not deny the freedom of the human will . . . He resisted the notion of double predestination, which argues that God not only decides to elect some to eternal life but also actively predestines others to eternal destruction . . .

. . . the distinction between justification and sanctification -- which came to the fore in the Reformation -- is almost totally absent from the medieval period . . .

Like Augustine, Aquinas believed that regeneration occurs at baptism . . . he held that not all the regenerate will persevere . . . Aquinas believed that humankind is unable to initiate or attain salvation except by the grace of God . . . he is completely dependent on God for salvation . . .

Augustine never held the doctrine of 'double' predestination . . . and actually argued against it . . .

Before Luther, the standard Augustinian position on justification stressed intrinsic justification. Intrinsic justification argues that the believer is made righteous by God's grace, as compared to extrinsic justification, by which a sinner is forensically declared righteous (at best, a subterranean strain in pre-Reformation Christendom). With Luther the situation changed dramatically . . .

--- Marcus Grodi (director of The Coming Home Network, and host of the EWTN television show: The Journey Home)

I highly recommend his work, A Biblical Defense of Catholicism, which I find to be thoroughly orthodox, well-written, and effective for the purpose of making Catholic truth more understandable and accessible to the public at large.

God bless you in your indefatigable labors on behalf of the Faith! Only God knows how many lives your efforts have touched with the truth. . . . God bless you and give you joy and strength in persevering in your important ministry.

There is someone out there who says what I have to say much better than I ever could -- the smartest Catholic apologist I know of -- Dave Armstrong.

--- Amy Welborn (Catholic author and blogmaster)

I love your books, love your site, love everything you do. God bless you in your work. I'm very grateful for all you've done, and for all you make available. If someone pitches a hard question at me, I go first to your site. Then I send the questioner directly to the page that best answers the question. I know it's going to be on your site.

--- Mike Aquilina (Catholic apologist and author of several books)

People regularly tell me how much they appreciate your work. This new book sounds very useful. Your website is incredible and I recommend it regularly to new Catholics.

--- Al Kresta (Host of Kresta in the Afternoon [EWTN], author of Why Do Catholics Genuflect? and other books)

Dave Armstrong's book A Biblical Defense of Catholicism was one of the first Catholic apologetics books that I read when I was exploring Catholicism. Ever since then, I have continued to appreciate how he articulates the Catholic Faith through his blog and books. I still visit his site when I need a great quote or clarification regarding anything . . . Dave is one of the best cyber-apologists out there.--- Dr. Taylor Marshall (apologist and author of The Crucified Rabbi)

I love how Dave makes so much use of the Scriptures in his arguments, showing that the Bible is fully compatible with Catholicism, even more plausibly so than it is with Protestantism.. . . Dave is the hardest working Catholic apologist I know. He is an inspiration to me.

--- Devin Rose (apologist and author of The Protestant's Dilemma, 28 May 2012 and 30 Aug. 2013)Dave Armstrong['s] website is an amazing treasure trove representing hours–yea a lifetime of material gathered to defend Catholic doctrine. Over the years Dave has gathered the evidence for Catholic teaching from just about every source imaginable. He has the strength not only to understand the Catholic faith, but to understand the subtleties and arguments of his Protestant opponents.--- Fr. Dwight Longenecker (author and prominent blogmaster, 6-29-12)

You are a very friendly adversary who really does try to do all things with gentleness and respect. For this I praise God.--- Nathan Rinne (Lutheran apologist [LC-MS] )

You are one of the most thoughtful and careful apologists out there.

Dave, I disagree with you a lot, but you're honorable and gentlemanly, and you really care about truth. Also, I often learn from you, even with regard to my own field. [1-7-14]

--- Dr. Edwin W. Tait (Anglican Church historian)

Dave Armstrong writes me really nice letters when I ask questions. . . . Really, his notes to me are always first class and very respectful and helpful. . . . Dave Armstrong has continued to answer my questions in respectful and helpful ways. I thank the Lord for him.

--- The late Michael Spencer (evangelical Protestant), aka "The Internet Monk", on the Boar's Head Tavern site, 27 and 29 September 2007

Dave Armstrong is a former Protestant Catholic who is in fact blessedly free of the kind of "any enemy of Protestantism is a friend of mine" coalition-building . . . he's pro-Catholic (naturally) without being anti-Protestant (or anti-Orthodox, for that matter).

---"CPA": Lutheran professor of history [seehis site]: unsolicited remarks of 12 July 2005

I am reading your stuff since I think it is the most thorough and perhaps the best defense of Catholicism out there . . . Dave has been nothing but respectful and kind to me. He has shown me great respect despite knowing full well that I disagree with him on the essential issues.

Dave has been a full-time apologist for years. He’s done much good for thousands of people.

You have a lot of good things to say, and you're industrious. Your content often is great. You've done yeoman work over the decades, and many more people [should] profit from your writing. They need what you have to say.--- Karl Keating (founder and director of Catholic Answers, the largest Catholic apologetics organization in the world; 5 Sep. 2013 and 1 Jan. 2015)

Whether one agrees with Dave's take on everything or not, everyone should take it quite seriously, because he presents his arguments formidably.

I like the way you present your stuff Dave ... 99% of the time.--- Protestant Dave Scott, 4-22-14 on my personal Facebook page.

Who is this Dave Armstrong? What is he really like? Well, he is affable, gentle, sweet, easily pleased, very appreciative, and affectionate . . . I was totally unprepared for the real guy. He's a teddy bear, cuddly and sweet. Doesn't interrupt, sits quietly and respectfully as his wife and/or another woman speaks at length. Doesn't dominate the conversation. Just pleasantly, cheerfully enjoys whatever is going on about him at the moment and lovingly affirms those in his presence. Most of the time he has a relaxed, sweet smile.

--- Becky Mayhew (Catholic), 9 May 2009, on the Coming Home Network Forum, after meeting me in person.

Every so often, I recommend great apostolates, websites, etc. And I am very careful to recommend only the very best that are entirely Catholic and in union with the Church. Dave Armstrong’s Biblical Evidence for Catholicism site is one of those. It is a veritable treasure chest of information. Dave is thorough in his research, relentlessly orthodox, and very easy to read.

Discussions with you are always a pleasure, agreeing or disagreeing; that is a rarity these days.

--- David Hemlock (Eastern Orthodox Christian), 4 November 2014.

What I've appreciated, Dave, is that you can both dish out and take argumentative points without taking things personally. Very few people can do that on the Internet. I appreciate hard-hitting debate that isn't taken personally.

--- Dr. Lydia McGrew (Anglican), 12 November 2014.

Dave Armstrong is a friend of mine with whom I've had many discussions. He is a prolific Catholic writer and apologist. If you want to know what the Catholic Church really believes, Dave is a good choice. Dave and I have our disagreements, but I'll put my arm around him and consider him a brother. There is too much dishonesty among all sides in stating what the "other side" believes. I'll respect someone who states fairly what the other believes.

Recommended Catholic Apologetics Links and Icons

Protestantism: Critical Reflections of an Ecumenical Catholic

Orthodoxy & Citation Permission

To the best of my knowledge, all of my theological writing is "orthodox" and not contrary to the official dogmatic and magisterial teaching of the Catholic Church. In the event of any (unintentional) doctrinal or moral error on my part having been undeniably demonstrated to be contrary to the Sacred Tradition of the Catholic Church, I will gladly and wholeheartedly submit to the authority and wisdom of the Church (Matthew 28:18-20; 1 Timothy 3:15).

All material contained herein is written by Dave Armstrong (all rights reserved) unless otherwise noted. Please retain full copyright, URL, and author information when downloading and/or forwarding this material to others. This information is intended for educational, spiritual enrichment, recreational, non-profitpurposes only, and is not to be exchanged for monetary compensation under any circumstances (Exodus 20:15-16).